MX600 vs MX400

[MerakiJockey505]

Is anyone currently using an MX600 in production?  I'm wondering what the difference in performance is like from an MX400.  Aside from the client threshold, are there many other advantages?

[NFL0NR]

We have the 600,  we had the 400 as a warm spare and I think the 600 was marginally faster, but not a night and day difference no. We've since upgraded to another 600 as a warm spare.   I think the biggest difference to us was VPN Users said the 600 was faster than the 400 when we tested.

[MerakiJockey505]

Thanks @NFL0NR, great info to know.  We have a lot of VPN users and they do often complain about slow connections. 

[bholmes12]

Are you running NAT mode or concentrator? 

How many remote sites do you have VPN'd in though the MX600? 

[BHC_RESORTS]

---

@NFL0NR wrote:

We have the 600,  we had the 400 as a warm spare and I think the 600 was marginally faster, but not a night and day difference no. We've since upgraded to another 600 as a warm spare.   I think the biggest difference to us was VPN Users said the 600 was faster than the 400 when we tested.

---

I was always curious what the difference in CPU was from the 400 to 600, or if they were arbitrary limits.  From a glance I always thought the main difference was the 4x1tb HDDs, which, in this day of dynamic web content, isn't real useful.

[MRCUR]

I have two MX600's in production in warm spare mode. These are used for firewall/NAT for ~20,000 users/10,000 devices. In total the upstream bandwidth is 4Gbps. We also do two site-to-site VPN tunnels, one is Meraki and the other is an ASA. Plenty of client VPN connections too without and problems. 

If you want to do a real world speedtest through my MXen, here you go: readingsd.speedtest.net

[BHC_RESORTS]

---

@MRCUR wrote:

I have two MX600's in production in warm spare mode. These are used for firewall/NAT for ~20,000 users/10,000 devices. In total the upstream bandwidth is 4Gbps. We also do two site-to-site VPN tunnels, one is Meraki and the other is an ASA. Plenty of client VPN connections too without and problems. 

If you want to do a real world speedtest through my MXen, here you go: readingsd.speedtest.net

---

Just for fun, I tried it.

From my corporate office, 100/100 fiber via Spectrum and an MX84: http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6561802911

From one of my sites, 150/150 fiber via ATT and an MX100: http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6561806710 (weird low upload...doing to a server in California almost maxes it out)

[MRCUR]

There's probably some awful peering between AT&T and Comcast along the way that's causing the very slow upload. 

[BHC_RESORTS]

---

@MRCUR wrote:

There's probably some awful peering between AT&T and Comcast along the way that's causing the very slow upload. 

---

Bad peering on either ATT or Comcast? Say it isn't so! /s

All joking aside, we're actually quite pleased with the ATT fiber. It routes well internationally as well normally, and has been stable as a rock. Plus they gave us a ridiculous amount of IPv4, and a monstrosity of a Cisco ISR for an Ethernet handoff. 

[MRCUR]

Comcast EDI has been really nice for us. Very fast routing to Netflix, Apple's CDN, etc. which is great for our use (K-12). We're adding a second circuit later this week that will go to Hurricane Electric.